LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- jennifer
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 91
- Joined: July 29th, 2010
PT60, S1, Q11 Most universities today...
I was torn between answer C and E. I got it correct on the real test but in review got it wrong and I can not figure out why C is the correct answer can you please help.
-
- ManhattanPrepLSAT2
-
Thanks Received: 311
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 303
- Joined: July 14th, 2009
Re: June 2010 LSAT LR Section 1 Question 11
Hi Jennifer --
Sorry -- I had to edit your post because we are not allowed to put official problems on the forums.
The author's conclusion is that universities offer a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education than ever before.
The evidence presented is that the textbooks they use now have more information about certain cultures (Asia, Africa) than they didn't before.
There is a pretty clear gap in the argument core -- having textbooks that mention certain cultures is not equivalent to, as a university, offering a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education. The gap is subtle, but it exists nonetheless. (Imagine that, while making these changes to the textbooks, the schools also eliminated diversity from the faculty, and cut the classes from 12 weeks each to 2 days each. Then the education would not be as in-depth and perhaps not as cosmopolitan. This is an extreme analogy, of course, but it does show the flaw -- textbooks alone are not enough evidence to reach the author's conclusion).
So, even though the gap is a subtle one, we can strengthen the argument by closing it, and (C) does just that.
(E) is too extreme. A class that offers reading on only one culture is irrelevant here. To illustrate, here's an analogous argument.
"Restaurant X has added five new dishes to its menu. Therefore, Restaurant X now offers it's customers a greater opportunity to get a healthy meal."
The equivalent of (E) would be "A restaurant that only serves one type of dish cannot offer a healthy meal."
Notice this has no clear impact on the argument.
Hope that helps!
Sorry -- I had to edit your post because we are not allowed to put official problems on the forums.
The author's conclusion is that universities offer a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education than ever before.
The evidence presented is that the textbooks they use now have more information about certain cultures (Asia, Africa) than they didn't before.
There is a pretty clear gap in the argument core -- having textbooks that mention certain cultures is not equivalent to, as a university, offering a more in-depth and cosmopolitan education. The gap is subtle, but it exists nonetheless. (Imagine that, while making these changes to the textbooks, the schools also eliminated diversity from the faculty, and cut the classes from 12 weeks each to 2 days each. Then the education would not be as in-depth and perhaps not as cosmopolitan. This is an extreme analogy, of course, but it does show the flaw -- textbooks alone are not enough evidence to reach the author's conclusion).
So, even though the gap is a subtle one, we can strengthen the argument by closing it, and (C) does just that.
(E) is too extreme. A class that offers reading on only one culture is irrelevant here. To illustrate, here's an analogous argument.
"Restaurant X has added five new dishes to its menu. Therefore, Restaurant X now offers it's customers a greater opportunity to get a healthy meal."
The equivalent of (E) would be "A restaurant that only serves one type of dish cannot offer a healthy meal."
Notice this has no clear impact on the argument.
Hope that helps!
2 posts Page 1 of 1